NamelessFaceless wrote:This is so sickening. Really, really sickening. I thought they were supposed to be using a glass tube now for the oral suction to prevent herpes transmission. Guess it didn't work. Wonder if it was the same Rabbi.

chairman bill wrote:Cock-sucking, vampire rabbis a part of God's plan? A fellatious argument, surely.

Globe wrote:

quisquose wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:

John P. M. wrote:Well, for when you need to walk through a desert for forty years, it helps make it easier to keep it clean. I'm not circumcised, and every dreary morning I have to spend ten minutes extra in the shower just because i have to drag all that foreskin back. It's a chore!

Besides, God obviously knew what he was doing when he created the penis. He also knew that by initially attaching a thing he called foreskin, he could then later on command people to remove it.

Ten minutes?

I can only speak for myself, but what should just be a quick procedure lasting a few seconds, once the foreskin has been dragged back, released, dragged back, released, dragged back, released, etc, the "procedure" very often lasts for 10 mins or more.

But is it called "washing" even when you do it in the shower?

The_Piper wrote:I got it, Zeus.

The Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office is investigating the death of a two-week old boy who perished at a Brooklyn hospital in September after contracting herpes through a controversial religious circumcision ritual.

HughMcB wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Cock-sucking, vampire rabbis a part of God's plan? A fellatious argument, surely.

Erecting phallacies again chairman?!

HughMcB wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:This is so sickening. Really, really sickening. I thought they were supposed to be using a glass tube now for the oral suction to prevent herpes transmission. Guess it didn't work. Wonder if it was the same Rabbi.

I fully agree, sucking off babies through a glass tube is surely the only way forward.

The_Piper wrote:Isn't it skin to skin contact for herpes also? Not suggesting it's not the stupid ritual's fault in this case. But could a young sibling with a cold sore for example, kiss a baby on the lips or eye or something and pass it also?

disseminated herpes simplex virus Type 1, complicating ritual circumcision with oral suction.

HughMcB wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:This is so sickening. Really, really sickening. I thought they were supposed to be using a glass tube now for the oral suction to prevent herpes transmission. Guess it didn't work. Wonder if it was the same Rabbi.

I fully agree, sucking off babies through a glass tube is surely the only way forward.

NamelessFaceless wrote:

The_Piper wrote:Isn't it skin to skin contact for herpes also? Not suggesting it's not the stupid ritual's fault in this case. But could a young sibling with a cold sore for example, kiss a baby on the lips or eye or something and pass it also?

Not sure if you're question was directed at me, and I honestly have no idea if the infant could have gotten it this way, but the Medical Examiner's report (according to the article) stated:

disseminated herpes simplex virus Type 1, complicating ritual circumcision with oral suction.

I can only assume the ME actually investigated the cause and came to the conclusion that it was indeed the oral suction.

NamelessFaceless wrote:

HughMcB wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:This is so sickening. Really, really sickening. I thought they were supposed to be using a glass tube now for the oral suction to prevent herpes transmission. Guess it didn't work. Wonder if it was the same Rabbi.

I fully agree, sucking off babies through a glass tube is surely the only way forward.

Ok, but can I just say FWIW I didn't mean to imply that this was an acceptable compromise.

HughMcB wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:

HughMcB wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:This is so sickening. Really, really sickening. I thought they were supposed to be using a glass tube now for the oral suction to prevent herpes transmission. Guess it didn't work. Wonder if it was the same Rabbi.

I fully agree, sucking off babies through a glass tube is surely the only way forward.

Ok, but can I just say FWIW I didn't mean to imply that this was an acceptable compromise.

I was just playing.

NamelessFaceless wrote:Oh, actually I do know of a case where a nursing mother gave her baby herpes. She was also co-sleeping. It's been a while since I read her story so I can't recall exactly how it happened.

In 2005, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg assembled rabbis throughout the city to try to persuade them to move away from metzitzah b’peh. But they said that the practice was safe and that there was no definitive evidence that it caused herpes. “The Orthodox Jewish community will continue the practice that has been practiced for over 5,000 years,” Rabbi David Niederman of the United Jewish Organization in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, said at the time. “‘We do not change. And we will not change.”